"   in evolution systems tend to develop up to the limit of their adaptive competence"

The Peter Principle

The Peter Principle was first introduced by L. Peter in a humoristic book (of the same title) describing the pitfalls of bureaucratic organization. The original principle states that in a hierarchically structured administration, people tend to be promoted up to their "level of incompetence". The principle is based on the observation that in such an organization new employees typically start in the lower ranks, but when they prove to be competent in the task to which they are assigned, they get promoted to a higher rank. This process of climbing up the hierarchical ladder can go on indefinitely, until the employee reaches a position where he or she is no longer competent. At that moment the process typically stops, since the established rules of bureacracies make that it is very difficult to "demote" someone to a lower rank, even if that person would be much better fitted and more happy in that lower position. The net result is that most of the higher levels of a bureaucracy will be filled by incompetent people, who got there because they were quite good at doing a different (and usually, but not always, easier) task than the one they are expected to do.

Copyright© 1993 Principia Cybernetica

My question is ... why is this  Peter Principle what overshadows all the skills and talents we each possess?  Who has NOT been victimized by this at some point?   It is such a shame to me that many people (me included) cannot find a position suited to their skills, abilities, and even temperment, but rather, are coerced into finding positions based on compensation or status.